Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

The one and only free public forum for Bohras. The focus of this forum is the reform movement, the Dawoodi Bohra faith and, of course, the corrupt priesthood. But the discussion is in no way restricted to the Bohras alone.
kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#91

Unread post by kimanumanu » Sun Feb 28, 2016 2:00 pm

anajmi wrote: Can you elaborate on what the "Zahir-Batin" fitnah is or was?
https://web.archive.org/web/20091127232 ... a/id6.html

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#92

Unread post by Biradar » Sun Feb 28, 2016 2:26 pm

anajmi wrote:Biradar,

Can you elaborate on what the "Zahir-Batin" fitnah is or was?
In short, the Zahir-Batin fitnah was an attempt to create a new doctrinal position that the Mazoon and Mukasir can be one in zahir and another in Batin. I am not sure who originated this theory, but it is likely it was thought up by Mr. Yusuf Najmudin. One has to remember that when SKQ was appointed as mazoon, his older brothers were jealous and extremely upset. Its clear that SMB was doing what his father had instructed him to do. That is, STS had instructed SMB to appoint SKQ as his mazoon and his successor. Which is the very first act that SMB did on becoming da'i. Also, the other point to remember is that the jealousy had actually started during the time of STS himself. Hence, when SMB appointed SKQ as his successor he did it in secret. This also explains the fact that for the 50 years of SMB's rule he did not say anything about the naas any longer, as he had already done it the moment he became the da'i.

Now, when the older brothers could no longer bear that they had to accept their younger as a mazoon they started hatching a conspiracy. At first, I am sure the only person who was involved in this was Yusuf Najmudin. Later, the roped in his other brothers, in particular, Mr. Aliasgar Kalimuddin and Mr. Qasim Hakimuddin (the latter is the current so-called mukasir). This group of conspirators also started to control the children of SMB, turning them against the mazoon and mukasir. I recall that the children of SMB used to make fun of Syedi Saleh bhaisaheb, the first mukasir of SMB.

This conspiracy was afoot probably for a long time, but they did not count on it being made public by Taizoon Shakir. He audio recorded the various parties involved in this fitna, getting incontrovertible proof of the evil hatched in the house of SMB himself. The final and most damming revelation was that the center of this conspiracy was no other than Dawedar Mr. Muffadul Saifuddin (DMMS).

Now lets consider this fact: the audio from 50 years ago in which SMB appointed his brother as mazoon is unambiguous and clear. He praised his brother, called him his beloved son and appointed him as mazoon. This even though there were many older and senior figures like Saleh bhaisaheb, Ibrahim bhaisaheb and many brothers of SMB. One should ask oneself why did SMB do this? Why would he pick a young man in his 20s over people who were much older than him, and, in fact, already occupied senior posts in the dawaat? The answer is clear: he considered his younger brother to be more capable and competent that any of his surviving uncles or his own other brothers.

I should also point out one more thing. The zahir-batin concept in Tayebi fiqh is unlike the concept in Nizari Ismailism. What I mean is that among the Nizaris, once one knows the batin then the zahir shaaria is no longer obligatory. Hence, they do not offer salaah like other Muslims do. This is rejected in the Tayebi fiqh. For bohras, the zahir shaaria is not optional. In fact, it must be followed even if one reaches the knowledge of taawil and haqaaiq. This point was elaborated by Syedna Hamiduddin Kirmani (RA) during the time of Imam Hakim when the Druze started to say that the Imam was divine.

As to the position of mazoon and mukasir. They are the same in zaahir and baatin. That condition is used in the misaaq text, which I have quoted above. Hence, those like Mr. Yusuf Najmuddin and others who modify that, can no longer be considered as reliable, and, like Iblis, can be considered to be bound for hell. Hence, their supports and they are classified as the "Iblisi Toli".

In any case, even without all these subtle points, it is clear that DMMS is not capable of being a da'i. I mean, anyone who hears that misogynist, ant-intellectual buffoon speak realizes this almost immediately. No need to elaborate further.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#93

Unread post by Biradar » Sun Feb 28, 2016 2:34 pm

Incidentally, I want to make a small point. It is true that in the Tayebi fiqh, the Imam's dawaat (while the Imam is in seclusion) is established by the Da'i al-Mutlaq, the Mazoon and the Mukasir. However, often, due to circumstances, the da'i may not appoint (openly) a mazoon and/or mukasir for a while. (Like the current situation with SKQ). In such situations, it is said that the "da'i carries the two rutbas within himself".

anajmi
Posts: 13403
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#94

Unread post by anajmi » Sun Feb 28, 2016 4:22 pm

Thank you for that information.

humanbeing
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#95

Unread post by humanbeing » Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:07 am

Biradar wrote:That is, STS had instructed SMB to appoint SKQ as his mazoon and his successor. Which is the very first act that SMB did on becoming da'i. Also, the other point to remember is that the jealousy had actually started during the time of STS himself. Hence, when SMB appointed SKQ as his successor he did it in secret. This also explains the fact that for the 50 years of SMB's rule he did not say anything about the naas any longer, as he had already done it the moment he became the da'i..
If SMB had clearly and openly appointed SKQ as his successor in his healthy life, there would not have been any split in the community. The gaaib-na-jaankar all knowing maula could have guessed this situation in his lifetime. This kind of situations are not even rocket science, a well thought head of the family writes a will to avoid such conflicts. A secret nuss has created more rift and danger to SKQ’s life.

All this ball talks of talwaaro-chaali-jaati is pretty deceptive. SMB was the man in power, if he held daawat positions in much higher regard than his scheming sons and brothers that he supposedly knew about, he could have take stern action, warning, expose them in public and safeguard mazoon or mukasirs from any such defamation. If SMB believed that there is a threat to SKQ’s life, for such reasons, threat would exist regardless of SKQ’s position as mazoon or next DAI. Publicly appointing SKQ would have saved the dilemma of the community and black faced schemers !

SMB appointed SKQ on instruction of STS, he had to oblige his father and Dai’s commands. Then SMB came into power and he changed his mind to not appoint SKQ as his successor. Too much secret-baazi and taqiyet in this messy family.

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#96

Unread post by Al-Noor » Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:26 am

The gaaib-na-jaankar all knowing maula could have guessed this situation in his lifetime.


yes actually he guessed it well and it was plan out well, you might want to read this story to know more details.

viewtopic.php?f=9&p=168579#p168579

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#97

Unread post by Biradar » Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:22 am

humanbeing wrote:
Biradar wrote:That is, STS had instructed SMB to appoint SKQ as his mazoon and his successor. Which is the very first act that SMB did on becoming da'i. Also, the other point to remember is that the jealousy had actually started during the time of STS himself. Hence, when SMB appointed SKQ as his successor he did it in secret. This also explains the fact that for the 50 years of SMB's rule he did not say anything about the naas any longer, as he had already done it the moment he became the da'i..
If SMB had clearly and openly appointed SKQ as his successor in his healthy life, there would not have been any split in the community. The gaaib-na-jaankar all knowing maula could have guessed this situation in his lifetime. This kind of situations are not even rocket science, a well thought head of the family writes a will to avoid such conflicts. A secret nuss has created more rift and danger to SKQ’s life.

All this ball talks of talwaaro-chaali-jaati is pretty deceptive. SMB was the man in power, if he held daawat positions in much higher regard than his scheming sons and brothers that he supposedly knew about, he could have take stern action, warning, expose them in public and safeguard mazoon or mukasirs from any such defamation. If SMB believed that there is a threat to SKQ’s life, for such reasons, threat would exist regardless of SKQ’s position as mazoon or next DAI. Publicly appointing SKQ would have saved the dilemma of the community and black faced schemers !

SMB appointed SKQ on instruction of STS, he had to oblige his father and Dai’s commands. Then SMB came into power and he changed his mind to not appoint SKQ as his successor. Too much secret-baazi and taqiyet in this messy family.
Can you tell me what happened after the Prophet openly appointed Ali as his successor amongst thousands? How many people followed Ali after the death of the Prophet? How many years Ali remained quiet, biding his time, waiting patiently. Also, can you tell me why Ali kept quiet? And also, why he did not openly oppose One, Two and Three, and made peace with Muawiyah (LA)? And, what happened despite the best intentions of Ali? Did or did not the nascent community split into Shia and Sunni or not? Has that split not persisted 1400 years later?

Also, lets think of the situation with S. Dawood Bin Qutubshah (RA). He was the mazoon and appointed by his predecessor openly. However, despite this, Sulaiman opposed him and created a schism. Hence, looking at history, its often not possible to prevent schisms of this sort. Groups and even religions for that matter, grow organically. They split and evolve. Even if say SMB had known the issues that would have followed on his death, there was probably little he could have done to prevent this. The tree of evil, watered by jealousy, had already taken root long before, and very little could be done to prevent it from flowering.

Another example: Imam Mustansir had essentially lost control of his own court and kingdom. The vazirs were so powerful that they controlled access to the Imam, even, at first, preventing someone of the stature of S. Moayyad Shirazi from visiting the Imam. The situation had deteriorated so much, that it took the intervention of Maulana Badr al-Jamali to bring order back into the kingdom. And, despite that, the community split int the Nizari and Mustali factions!

More example: During the time of Imam Hakim, the Druze rose, claiming the Imam was divine. What could the Imam do? He tried his best to suppress this heresy, even summoning S. Hamid al-din Kirmani to Egypt to try and talk sense to the schismatics. What happened? The community split, and the Druze continue to maintain their own distinct identity.

So unless you are also ready to condemn the Prophet for the split in the community (into Shia and Sunni), or the Imams for the various splits that happened during their time, lets not lay blame thoughtlessly at SMB's feet.

My friend, we do not fully understand the compulsions on SMB. It is likely he made many mistakes in his life, and perhaps some fatal ones. However, that does not mean he did not take action. Perhaps he did. Do you have children, by the way? Do you think they will listen to you when you get old? Or, put it another way, do you listen to all your father or mother says? When money and power are involved, things take a life of their own. It is hard to predict what will happen then.

Incidentally, I want to point out something. Very often, and repeatedly, SMB would exhort that one should take care of one's parents. He would say something to the effect "When you father is old, do not put him in the corner and ignore him. Ask him for his advice. When you were little he raised you. Make him feel involved". Now, I ask you who was this directed to? One can imagine it was his own sons. Not only did they not understand the message he repeatedly try to convey to them, they intact did the opposite! Treated him like some mannequin, humiliated him and paraded him around for their own profit. Often, life and events are hard to control, despite best intentions.

In any case, all these points are, in some ways, moot. We need to think of the future. Remaining in the Iblisi Toli is not an options. The Progressives have done good work, but they at this point at a loss on what to do. Also, they have no viable long-term goal. The option, to those who love the Bohra culture, its history and literature and philosophy, the only choice is to join the Fatemidawat movement. Perhaps it will fail too, but then it will still be worth the risk. They have done all the right things, making knowledge open, making available various things for various miqaats, not putting pressure on anyone, leading a quiet and peaceful life, etc. Actions speak louder than words.

(Incidentally, have you or anyone else hear SMB say himself that he has knowledge of unseen things? Please let me know. This is propaganda by the same Iblisi Toli, who have tried to do ghullu (exaggeration) to enhance their own power and prestige).

humanbeing
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#98

Unread post by humanbeing » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:20 am

Biradar wrote:Can you tell me what happened after the Prophet openly appointed Ali as his successor amongst thousands? How many people followed Ali after the death of the Prophet? How many years Ali remained quiet, biding his time, waiting patiently. Also, can you tell me why Ali kept quiet? And also, why he did not openly oppose One, Two and Three, and made peace with Muawiyah (LA)? And, what happened despite the best intentions of Ali? Did or did not the nascent community split into Shia and Sunni or not? Has that split not persisted 1400 years later?
Bro Biradar, my responses are not my views but the learnings from various sources, when similar questions such as yours are presented. In Imam Ali and Prophet Muhammad’s case the controversy of succession is pitted against influential clan leaders (khalifaas). Be it prophet or Ali chose to act in secrecy keeping the socio-political situation in mind. Whereas SMB’s conflict is against petty position less family members. Many shia scholars claim that, Ali kept quiet for the bigger betterment or unity of muslim ummah. He kept quiet at 1st, 2nd and 3rd successions, this seems more like agreement with what was going on, rather than wait and bid time. We can raise & close many questions with responses limited to “hikmah”
Biradar wrote: Hence, looking at history, its often not possible to prevent schisms of this sort. Groups and even religions for that matter, grow organically. They split and evolve. Even if say SMB had known the issues that would have followed on his death, there was probably little he could have done to prevent this. The tree of evil, watered by jealousy, had already taken root long before, and very little could be done to prevent it from flowering.
You very well stated that, inspite of open nuss, schism took place, atleast the DAI did his job clear and open. There countless things Islam tells people to do and not do, people don’t follow. This does not dissolve SMB’s responsibility of issuing a clear Nuss. Your sympathy for SMB is fine, but if SMB wants to command respect and following of millions promising them heaven, least he can do is grow a spine to uproot the tree of evil or at least .. atleast expose this tree of evil to the whole wide world, be it from his own family. Let people / follower‘s fate who they want to follow.
Biradar wrote: Another example: Imam Mustansir had essentially lost control of his own court and kingdom. The vazirs were so powerful that they controlled access to the Imam, even, at first, preventing someone of the stature of S. Moayyad Shirazi from visiting the Imam. The situation had deteriorated so much, that it took the intervention of Maulana Badr al-Jamali to bring order back into the kingdom. And, despite that, the community split int the Nizari and Mustali factions!
More example: During the time of Imam Hakim, the Druze rose, claiming the Imam was divine. What could the Imam do? He tried his best to suppress this heresy, even summoning S. Hamid al-din Kirmani to Egypt to try and talk sense to the schismatics. What happened? The community split, and the Druze continue to maintain their own distinct identity.
Such examples; is this Imamate concept really strong, the divinely appointed Imams are controlled by its own men ! Imam to be rescued by Dai !! I m not accusing Imams, the situation you explained above is naturally occurring, none can help. Concern is when exaggerators elevate Imam’s status to some sort of divine, over the top next to god kinda power and then conveniently start crying about Imam being helpless and cornered ! (pal-mein-masha-pal-mein-tola)

Biradar wrote: So unless you are also ready to condemn the Prophet for the split in the community (into Shia and Sunni), or the Imams for the various splits that happened during their time, lets not lay blame thoughtlessly at SMB's feet. .
There is no need to condemn prophet or blame him for schism. Prophet, Ali, Abu bakr, Othman or Umar anyone did not wish to have the schism, it was people and their political self interest who chose to side with respective leaders. As long as the leader fulfilled his successorship delegation, blame does not lie on him. And secret nuss jazz doesn’t make a sound delegation of authority, rather open a bag of confusion.
Biradar wrote: My friend, we do not fully understand the compulsions on SMB. It is likely he made many mistakes in his life, and perhaps some fatal ones. However, that does not mean he did not take action. Perhaps he did. .
Yes, we do not understand compulsions and dilemmas that SMB faced, this indecisiveness brings him down to commoner level and he should be stripped of his leadership if he cannot resolve his own dilemmas and compulsions that in all common sense (forget ghaib-na-jaankar jazz) causes rift and disharmony in the community. this is a billion dollar community, not his personal family matter that he can walk around in his helpless dilemmas to whether support his step brother or spoilt children.
The actions or rather lack of it that SMB took, we are seeing the consequences, similarly we are unaware of his intentions, the result is out there to see, SMB family is looting the community with both hands , getting richer, powerful and influential day by day ! while 99 % and 1 % of community throwing laanats on each other.
Biradar wrote: Do you have children, by the way? Do you think they will listen to you when you get old? Or, put it another way, do you listen to all your father or mother says? When money and power are involved, things take a life of their own. It is hard to predict what will happen then. .
Children will not listen, that does not matter. What is important that father’s communicate the right and wrongs, it is upto children to choose their own path. And to walk on the path of righteousness, a father must take hard steps. at the debate of righteousness, there is no father and sons, there is only right and there is wrong ! SMB as a father can forgive, ignore, punish, encourage or discourage his family’s excesses, let him be not a leader of a community then. But when he takes the mantle and commands the respect and finances of the community, he better rise up to his important responsibilities.

Biradar wrote: Incidentally, I want to point out something. Very often, and repeatedly, SMB would exhort that one should take care of one's parents. He would say something to the effect "When you father is old, do not put him in the corner and ignore him. Ask him for his advice. When you were little he raised you. Make him feel involved". Now, I ask you who was this directed to? One can imagine it was his own sons. Not only did they not understand the message he repeatedly try to convey to them, they intact did the opposite! .
Very sad indeed, if SMB in some or many ways was taunting his sons or family members. Another “be-a-man” option would be to pass a formal announcement (risala) with proofs to declare baraat on such schemers. Such schemers would not have any formal standing to continue discrete or openly to stigmatize rightful claimants to the position. The schemers; from harmless kids turned into petty position less adults into now powerful forces to change direction of the community. what was SMB doing ? waiting monsters to grow into this power today !

Does SMB silence resolved threat to SKQ ? SKQ was and still is in danger because SMB kept silent. Did SMB’s silence safeguard the community ? infact his very silence is the cause of rift, hatred and split of many families including his own. Now one can debate forever if his silence was helpless or intentional ?
Biradar wrote: (Incidentally, have you or anyone else hear SMB say himself that he has knowledge of unseen things? Please let me know. This is propaganda by the same Iblisi Toli, who have tried to do ghullu (exaggeration) to enhance their own power and prestige).
I can roughly say that, heard SMB saying “mein-sab-jaanu-chu-ek-ek-mumin-na-ghar-ma-su-thai-rahu-chey types” and other such similar statements, which then Kothari chamchaas elaborate on the interpretation exaggerating that this is akin to ghaib na jankar quality to the likes of Imam or noor of Imam reflecting through Dai kinda jazz.

Lets not be so naïve, Dai and his team play a nice game. Certain things are said cleverly by the DAI in a politically correct way and then chamchaas go to any length to twist, turn, bend and stretch to a philosophy to suit their needs. While those interpretations are happening with raza of supreme leader. If all goes well, it becomes a concept, if not then chamchaas can take the blame and let time forget the matter.
Biradar wrote: In any case, all these points are, in some ways, moot. We need to think of the future. Remaining in the Iblisi Toli is not an options. The Progressives have done good work, but they at this point at a loss on what to do. Also, they have no viable long-term goal. The option, to those who love the Bohra culture, its history and literature and philosophy, the only choice is to join the Fatemidawat movement. Perhaps it will fail too, but then it will still be worth the risk. They have done all the right things, making knowledge open, making available various things for various miqaats, not putting pressure on anyone, leading a quiet and peaceful life, etc. Actions speak louder than words.
All in good sense, SKQ camp seems to be more sober and down to earth at present. Free thinkers will always remain free and not worry about affiliation dilemmas. While such free thinkers can use this SMS or SKQ camp for their social conveniences.

Al-Noor
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 9:55 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#99

Unread post by Al-Noor » Mon Feb 29, 2016 6:34 am

MS and KQ followers can spend all their life and resources to prove who is right and who is wrong, but the good thing out of all this family drama proves one thing that there is not an ounce of spirituality left in this community...yes people can follow KQ and MS according to their convenience but please concept of qayamat naa din aawi ne haath thaamse is flawed....now rest is up to the people.

Stick with Quran/Hadith and love for Muhammed(s) and his rightful family, this is the only way to deen in your life and rest of all fancy stories specially about this STS khandaan is gone to dustbin.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#100

Unread post by Biradar » Mon Feb 29, 2016 1:17 pm

Humanbeing: I can't respond to every thing you said, as it would mean I am here all day! However, let me address a couple of points:
humanbeing wrote: "Ali, Abu bakr, Othman or Umar anyone did not wish to have the schism, it was people and their political self interest who chose to side with respective leaders."
Really? I am actually 100% certain that One, Two and Three actually wanted a schism to occur. From the start, they were in it for power and wealth and refused to acknowledge the primacy of the Prophet's family. For example, the exalted position of Muhammad, Ali, Fatema, Hassan and Hussain are described in the Qur'an itself. Everyone knew this, as the incident occurred in the lifetime of the prophet (I mean the incident of the revelation of the ayah al-tathir). Interestingly, the Prophet's wife was not included among the Panjataan, indicating the rather narrow meaning of the word "alh-e-bait". Also, the incident of Gaadir happened when all three were present. Then, knowing this, why would they refuse to accept the primacy of Ali? The answer is obvious. Its they who are to blame and not their followers.

Ali is the exception, in that he patiently waited 25+ years, letting the three usurper do what they liked. In fact, you may want to read Ali's words on this:

http://www.al-islam.org/nahjul-balagha- ... bu-quhafah
humanbeing wrote: Such examples; is this Imamate concept really strong, the divinely appointed Imams are controlled by its own men ! Imam to be rescued by Dai !! I m not accusing Imams, the situation you explained above is naturally occurring, none can help. Concern is when exaggerators elevate Imam’s status to some sort of divine, over the top next to god kinda power and then conveniently start crying about Imam being helpless and cornered ! (pal-mein-masha-pal-mein-tola)
Imams and even the prophet were humans. Can you tell me if you consider Imam Hussain as Imam or not? Was he and his family not massacred at Karbala or not? Then, do you think that the Qur'an exaggerates his position as one of the Panjataan? Or the Prophet exaggerated his (and Imam Hassan's) position as the leaders of all men in heaven? Then, you could also ask, how come a person like Hussain could not escape and save himself and his family? You seem not to understand that the Imams are human, and subject to the same conditions as all humans: sickness, death, loss in battle, fatigue and conspiracies. Don't get carried away by propaganda of those who want to insult the Imams and the Prophet.

Minor elaboration: the Panjataan and the Imams occupy a dual existence. One, in the Realm of Ideas (Aalam al-'ibda) and then their physical existence in the physical world. In the latter, they are subject to the same problems and tribulations as all other humans are.

Also, just some advice. If you are doing anything for "social convenience", don't do it. I have told you this before, but its people like you who do things for "social convenience" who are really the root of many problems in this world. You can't take a stand for anything you believe in, and hence are manipulated and controlled by greedy and gluttonous tyrants. Please, I request you, stop! Grow a spine.

SBM
Posts: 6429
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#101

Unread post by SBM » Mon Feb 29, 2016 2:14 pm

Biradar
Seems like you have given too much pass to SMB, Remembers Corruption started seeping in Dawat during STS reign, Saifee Technical High School, taking over all the Charitable organizations as well as starting Baraat against those who did not fall in line started during 51st era and gained more steam during 52nd.
STS started power grabbing to himself while 52nd made sure that his immediate family is taken care and now 53rd is only concentrating accumulation of wealth as much as possible.
Current status of 53 is parallel to what is happening in Saudi Arabia where Salman let his half brother go and bring in his son just like SMS is doing.

anajmi
Posts: 13403
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#102

Unread post by anajmi » Mon Feb 29, 2016 8:57 pm

From the start, they were in it for power and wealth and refused to acknowledge the primacy of the Prophet's family.
This is idle talk. Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman were pretty powerful and wealthy before the advent of Islam. And when they joined forces with the prophet (saw) there was no saying that they would be successful in their mission. There was no power or wealth to be gained unless, they were absolutely certain that they would be victorious. And that would happen only if they had absolute faith in the mission of the prophet (saw) and that would've made them the foremost amongst the faithful. Which they were. Abu Bakr and Uthman sacrificed much of their wealth for the sake of Islam. If they were in it for the power and wealth, they would've had to be ghaib na jannaar like the the Dais of today!!
and refused to acknowledge the primacy of the Prophet's family.
There was no such thing as a "royal family" during the time of the prophet (saw). This is apparent from the teachings of the prophet (saw) himself. The royal families of today are a result of this misunderstanding pre-valent amongst the ignorant for the last 1400 years.
For example, the exalted position of Muhammad, Ali, Fatema, Hassan and Hussain are described in the Qur'an itself.
No it isn't. This is again the people adding 2 and 2 together and coming up with 5 (pun intended).
Also, the incident of Gaadir happened when all three were present.
The incident of Ghadir is the same as the incident where the Dai declared Nuss on Mufaddal!! Fiction.

There is no concept of "Panjatan" in the Quran. This is similar to the christian holy trinity. The trinity is not mentioned in the bible, but it is mentioned in the Quran. What does the Quran say about it? Check it out.
Then, you could also ask, how come a person like Hussain could not escape and save himself and his family? You seem not to understand that the Imams are human, and subject to the same conditions as all humans: sickness, death, loss in battle, fatigue and conspiracies. Don't get carried away by propaganda of those who want to insult the Imams and the Prophet.
You seem to forget the part where Allah offered him help with defeating the armies of Yazid but Hussain chose to sacrifice himself and his family. At least, that is what the bohra fairy tales claim.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#103

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:58 am

SBM wrote:Biradar
Seems like you have given too much pass to SMB,
Not at all. I have previously vigorously defended the progressive movement, and have said several times that I do not consider that the da'i is infallible. I agree that a lot of corruption started during the time of STS. I am not sure yet what the sequence of events were, but I believe that the real problem had started during the time of the 46th da'i, S. Mohammed Badruddin. At that time the ulema had become very powerful, and disputed the succession of S. Abdulqader Najmuddin, wanting to grab power for themselves. However, the long period of S. Abdulqader Najmuddin's reign of 47 years saw the beginning of the end of the control of the ulema. STS finally destroyed their power, and the da'i emerged completely victorious. In this mess, spread over about 75 years (i.e. at the start of STS's reign) hearts had been hardened, and there was a major confrontation brewing. STS, using his own charisma and strength essentially brought an end to the ulema as a class with power, and solidified the power of the da'i's family. This had the side-effect of massive increase in corruption, which has eventually led, 100 years later, to this schism.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#104

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Mar 01, 2016 1:05 am

I should say the arithmetic for those who do not believe in Ali, and dispute even the account in ayat al-Tathir and its provenance, the equation is 3 = 0. For others, i.e. the Shi'a, the equation is 1 = 5. No more needs to be said.

humanbeing
Posts: 2195
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2011 2:30 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#105

Unread post by humanbeing » Tue Mar 01, 2016 3:07 am

Bro Biradar
You seem to have missed the contention of my points. Debating on Prophet Muhammad’s life incidents can go endless from shia-sunni perspectives. According to many authors Imams are powerful and helpless in whichever convenient realms / dimension of life or life after. I am no scholar / expert. My comments are limited to my reading of events and descriptions provided by authors. Cant blame Imams if authors have exaggerated the stories be it from power or helpless perspectives.

I can present a unbiased view on many incidents we discuss about Imam, Ahle Bayt, 1 2 3, etc but that would be not easy for biased perspective holders from all sides of the argument.
We are discussing the carelessness / helplessness of SMB as it is happening in the time of our existence. Challenges, circumstances, position and responsibilities differ than the comparisons we are drawing with previous times of prophet, imams or duaats !
Biradar wrote:Also, just some advice. If you are doing anything for "social convenience", don't do it. I have told you this before, but its people like you who do things for "social convenience" who are really the root of many problems in this world. You can't take a stand for anything you believe in, and hence are manipulated and controlled by greedy and gluttonous tyrants. Please, I request you, stop! Grow a spine.
The world is full of problems ! what shall I do ? Sit fighting for people who don’t wanna be helped. How did you judge so quickly that I have not taken a stand ? is social convenience so wrong ! aren’t you living in social convenience ? is your world perfect ? do you go protesting on streets for every thing that is not going correctly around you.

How did you judge that I am being manipulated and controlled ? I have grown a spine. It would have been better if SMB had one to stop his nefarious family’s filth take a community for ride.

My stand, my beliefs are sufficient to rescue me from the clutches of the tyrants, and I help those who deserved to be helped. Those who are open to be helped, those who realize they need help. And how can I help. ? In a simplest manner, I help by being kind, listen, show them all the facts and let them decide whats better for them.

Abdes have become wild monkeys on steroids, forget listening, a word other than their beliefs and they would go bananas.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#106

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:25 pm

humanbeing wrote: I can present a unbiased view on many incidents we discuss about Imam, Ahle Bayt, 1 2 3, etc but that would be not easy for biased perspective holders from all sides of the argument.
The world is full of problems ! what shall I do ? Sit fighting for people who don’t wanna be helped. How did you judge so quickly that I have not taken a stand ? is social convenience so wrong ! aren’t you living in social convenience ? is your world perfect ? do you go protesting on streets for every thing that is not going correctly around you.

How did you judge that I am being manipulated and controlled ? I have grown a spine. It would have been better if SMB had one to stop his nefarious family’s filth take a community for ride.

There no such things as unbiased views. You yourself have admitted you are not a scholar. So how can you provide any view, leave alone unbiased ones? I showed you Ali's words about "The Son of Abu Quhafah". Yet, you ignorantly said that it was all politics of followers who caused the first schism! I mean, come on. (I mean the events after the death of the Prophet).

Also, I am not asking you to fight for every cause under the planet. But, this is your community which is being hijacked by the nefarious mafia of DMMS!! All I ask is for you to take a stand and zero your participation in it. I have said it many times, that we feel we have that and this compulsion. There is not such thing. Its only cowardice. The choice it yours.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#107

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Mar 01, 2016 1:09 pm

In sermon 26, Ali says (about the time right after the death of the Prophet):

"I looked and found that there is no supporter for me except family, so I refrained from thrusting them unto death. I kept my eyes closed despite motes in them. I drank despite choking of throat. I exercised patience despite trouble in breathing and despite having to take sour colocynth as food."

Wajid
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#108

Unread post by Wajid » Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:05 pm

Salaams to all,

Thank you (Biradar, Humanbeing, SBM, Anajmi etc ...) for sparking this debate. Here, may I say, I understand should be a debate about the "whereabouts" of Dawoodi Bohra fiqh. Here we are all convinced on the veracity of Ali (as).

As I have made an observation in my earlier post. The Quran presents all sorts of similitude for us to derive ibrat from :
وَلَقَدْ صَرَّفْنَا لِلنَّاسِ فِي هَـذَا الْقُرْآنِ مِن كُلِّ مَثَلٍ فَأَبَى أَكْثَرُ النَّاسِ إِلاَّ كُفُورًا (17:89)
And We have explained to man, in this Qur'an, every kind of similitude: yet the greater part of men refuse (to receive it) except with ingratitude!

Coming to the similitude that I put in my previous post about Haroun (as): If it were not the Quran vindicating Harour (as), we would have all conveniently jumped to the conclusion that Haroun (as) joined with his people in transgression and shirk. Today even, a majority of people (Jews / Christian) do believe so. Therefore it is not always black and white and we cannot rationalize everything around us. So putting blame on SMB (ra) on his actions / inactions will not bring us anywhere.

Today our Dawat is a quagmire. As I tried to elaborate in my prior post, for those who found another route (like our friend Anajmi), this is a non-issue. However for multitudes of Bohra men and women, who want to remain in the Dawoodi Bohra fiqh, the only viable option is to side with SKQ (tus). After a long time, we see some hope of revival of the Dawat.

وَمِنْ آيَاتِهِ أَنَّكَ تَرَى الْأَرْضَ خَاشِعَةً فَإِذَا أَنزَلْنَا عَلَيْهَا الْمَاء اهْتَزَّتْ وَرَبَتْ إِنَّ الَّذِي أَحْيَاهَا لَمُحْيِي الْمَوْتَى إِنَّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ (41:39)
For among His signs is this: thou seest the earth lying desolate - and lo! when We send down water upon it, it stirs and swells [with life]! Verily, He who brings it to life can surely give life to the dead [of heart as well]: for, behold, He has the power to will anything. [34] - 41:39
In the reflection of the above ayah, today our community has gone dead and lying desolate. We have a unique chance, bi-hamdillah, that it can come back to life again - Inshallah.

If you are disenchanted with the MS and co. (“Iblisi toil) but if you still a part of the system, you are supporting the system.
I know it is easy to talk (all of us have families and friends trapped in this mess). As a sign of protest, we can atleast stop participation in their affairs. Financially - not even a dollar contribution ...

وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَ الَّذِينَ يَخُوضُونَ فِي آيَاتِنَا فَأَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ حَتَّى يَخُوضُواْ فِي حَدِيثٍ غَيْرِهِ وَإِمَّا يُنسِيَنَّكَ الشَّيْطَانُ فَلاَ تَقْعُدْ بَعْدَ الذِّكْرَى مَعَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَ (6:68)
When thou seest men engaged in vain discourse about Our signs, turn away from them unless they turn to a different theme. If Satan ever makes thee forget, then after recollection, sit not thou in the company of those who do wrong.

The bottom line is – if you are a Dawoodi Bohra, as Biradar puts is rightly : it is an obligation to take a stand. What will be the legacy we leave for our future generation if we do not stand-up now against the tyranny of Kothar and the “Iblisi toli” !

Fi AmanIllah

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#109

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Tue Mar 01, 2016 6:49 pm

SBM wrote:Biradar
Seems like you have given too much pass to SMB, Remembers Corruption started seeping in Dawat during STS reign, Saifee Technical High School, taking over all the Charitable organizations as well as starting Baraat against those who did not fall in line started during 51st era and gained more steam during 52nd.
STS started power grabbing to himself while 52nd made sure that his immediate family is taken care and now 53rd is only concentrating accumulation of wealth as much as possible.
Current status of 53 is parallel to what is happening in Saudi Arabia where Salman let his half brother go and bring in his son just like SMS is doing.
Let me take the liberty to repost a couple of articles that appeared on this forum which will EXPOSE the misdeeds of the last 2 mafia leaders .......

Look at the difference:

Just two examples of Taher Saifuddin Maula :-

1) After the humiliating defeat in the Chandabhoy Galla Case, Taher Saifuddin Maula went to Surat but he managed a murderous attack on Ebrahimji Adamji Peerbhoy and when Ebrahinji was admitted in Cama Hospital he sent flowers and wished him well as a childhood friend.

2) When Amtullah bai, the daughter-in-law of Sir Adamji died on 12th July 1930, Taher Saifuddin Maula refused her burial in the Bohra Kabrastan at Charni Road, then her body was buried in the nearby plot behind Sir Adamji Peerbhoy Sanatorium owned by Sir Adamji's family. Taher Saifuddin Maula sent four Bohra fanatics in the dead of night who dug her grave and threw the naked body on the footpath in front of the Sanatorium. Bombay Samachar wrote a front page Editorial with the photograph of the body lying on the footpath. Morarji Desai who was the Home Minister of Bombay Province then was first person to see it. So he moved a motion in the assembly for prevention of excommunication stating that "Bohra Mullaji's powers are "Monstrous" (Shaitanic).


Three examples of Burhanuddin Maula:-

1) In June 1966 he went to Karachi and sent his men to kill Mulla Abbas Aurangabadi who entred in his house, tied him with a chair and burnt him alive by pouring petrol on his body in broad day light. Mulla Abass died in the Karachi's Civil Hospital next day after giving his dying declaration naming Burhanuddin Maula and his brother Yusuf Najmuddin as conspirators.

2) On 1st March 1973 the innocent women of Udaipur were molested and dishonoured in his presence. They were shouting Maula Bachao, Maula Bachao" but he kept smiling. That resulted in the mass revolt against Burhanuddin Maula in Udaipur.

3) Burhanuddin Maula traveled from Indore to Mumbai in the same air-craft in which Asghar Ali Engineer had boarded from Bhopal after addressing a Police workshop on communal harmony. One Amil Husain Bhai Saheb was abusing Mr. Engineer throughout the journey but Burhanuddin Maula said nothing. When he arrived at Mumbai airport he got down from the air-craft on wheel chair surrounded by his strongmen. But after he came out, he told the Bohras waiting at airport that “Maloon” Engineer pushed him while getting down. Then the agitated crowd threw stones at Asghar Ali Engineer and beat him up. The airport police was surprised, as reported in the newspapers that in a place like airport how the Bohras managed to gather so many stones.

Thereafter Burhanuddin Maula's goon ransacked Asghar Ali's locked house and office and threw his books on the road. Again as per newspapers report one Police inspector from Santacruz Police station was quoted as saying "These Bohras have thrown out the copies of Quran too. Is Mr. Engineer's Quran different then dharmguru's Quran?


Extracts from the Nathwani Commission Report● January 02, 2008


Various methods are used to harass and persecute the socially boycotted persons. One of the most commonly used is attack on residence, shops or other work establishments, physical attack on persons concerned as also the close members of their families if they have not broken away from them. Beating and spitting are two such methods.

Amongst others are forcible expulsion from attendance and prayers at Masjids, graveyards, religious ceremonies associated with birth, marriages, deaths, harassing sick members of the family of the person under Baraat, removal from employment if the employer is a Bohra are commonly resorted to.

Another very obnoxious method is separation of wife from husband, brother from brother, sister and all close relatives. We have received several instances of forced break up of marriages. Mental torture and cruelty inflicted can only be imagined when sons and daughters have been prevented from meeting their parents on their death bed or from performing ceremonies associated with burial.


Such examples are common and found in Bombay, Ahmedabad, Udaipur, Godhra to mention only a few in India from various towns also of East African countries and Pakistan. Some of the respondents have stated that private armies of men and of women are maintained by the priestly class for harassment, assault and persecution of the reformers and also for the purposes of spying on their activities.

Medical practitioners are boycotted if in the course of their duties they render service or treat any reformers. Dr. Cutlerywala has suffered much for helping the sick. Children also have not been spared. Bohra students are organised to beat them up, spit on them and do everything to make life miserable for little children in school.

Mohmedali Hasanali aged 77 years, states from Nairobi that in 1968 he was thrown out of Masjid during the presence of Sayedna. He was not allowed to participate in the burial of his wife who died on 6-4-1973 in Mombasa. He was prevented from attending the marriage of his daughter and his son in Mombasa. When his sons visited Africa, they were forcibly prevented from meeting the father. As if all this is not enough, he was actually assaulted by the orthodox.

When he visited India in 1976 after 23 years, the social boycott followed him because Sayedna's agent in Nairobi sent a telegram. During his absence, shop in Mombasa was taken away from his son and he is not allowed the use of his property which is being sought to be taken away as Sayedna is said to be the owner.

(There were mass assaults in Galiakot and Moidpura Masjid in Udaipur, Women and Children were also assaulted. This created strong resentment and Udaipur has become a very good stronghold of reformists. Their relatives in Bombay and other places are made to suffer for their relationships).

The best illustration of persecution inflicted and suffered is of Mohmedhussain Gulamabbas Udaipurwala, an active worker of Bombay youth association. His son aged 8 years was expelled from Saifi High School and when readmitted because of government order was so badly treated by other children of the school under instructions from their elders that with great difficulty he had to be admitted to another school. His wife was removed from the Masjid during Mohrum Vaez.

As if this was not enough, he was asked to vacate the residential flat where he lives. On his continuing there, deliberate damage is caused to the residence. Life really became dangerous for him. Besides abusing and spitting on him and his family members, on 23-8-1978 his neighbours seriously injured him by beating him with an iron rod on his head.

A.A. Udaipuri, an advocate who had taken the oath of allegiance (misaaq) again in Bombay in 1973 purchased a flat in Bombay constructed by the orthodox supporters of Sayedna but the religious hierarchy were Leasors of the plot. He and some others were not given their title deeds. So they lodged a criminal complaint in the additional chief metropolitan magistrate court in Bombay. Only then they learnt that the original documents of the title deeds were false and fabricated. Thereafter persecution followed and he and his family were under Baraat and the social boycott is very intense against him.

Nomanbhai Contractor, a Bombay reformist leader, visited Godhra, his native place with his family on 12-6-1977. He visited a fellow reformist Pawagadhwala and a large crowd of Bohras surrounded the latter's house. Zainuddin was in a cinema house when he received a phone call from his house and he informed the police to protect the reformist leader and his host. Sayedna's men knew it and his house was surrounded and stoned. Contractor's motor car was totally burnt. Pawagadhwala of Godhra has also been subjected to personal humiliation and assault. His sister in law was attacked and she suffered injury because she was in his house.

We can multiply instances but those given above would do. Among those who had suffered most are Abidali Jafarbhai Gulguliwala of Dahod, Alihussain Tayyebbhai Cyclewala, Hussain Kurbanhussain Sanchawala. Sanchawala had an additional tale of persecution to tell which in its enormity exceeds anything said here.

His father had started in 1935 Anjumane Mohmedi in cooperation with seven other reformists of Dahod in Gujarat. He was conducting night classes for old and young and tailoring class for giving employment to the poor. All these were forced to be closed down because of social boycott and persecution. Even the school which they started in Surat could not run. One serious allegation by Sanchawala is that from 47th Dai upto 50th Dai the priestly class was in debt because it used to spend for the welfare of the community and the community used to pay their debt. After 51st Dai, Dai's family has become one of the richest families in the world by exploiting the community ruthlessly.

Mohmedbhai Shamshuddin Cutpiecewala of Surat had given oral evidence in the criminal court at Surat 50 years ago against forcible signatures for exemption for the operation of the Wakf Act 1923. He was beaten up and he has been socially boycotted since then. Tayyabbhai M. Bolbol, Zakiruddin Kadarbhai Roker and Taherbhai Abdul Gafur Kinkhabwala aged 82 years, have been under Baraat since the Chandabhai Galla case. Besides ruining their business they had the other horrible experience of having dirt and human excreta thrown on their person.

Teherali Abdulali Kapadia of Dhoraji Gujrat has been suffering the boycott for a number of years. The entire family with the aged father and women members is put to great harassment. When his infant daughter died, he was refused burial in the Bohra graveyard. But the police and other Muslim and non-Muslim friends helped him.

Moiz Salebhai Mediwala of Jamnagar Taiyabi Zamindar of Ahmedabad and several others have recounted horrible tales of persecution of men, women and innocent children.

Sheikh Ahmedali Qurban Hussain Rajnagarwala suffered most because of the forced divorces of his two daughters Shahre Banu and Nafisa. One of his daughters was divorced when she was pregnant and the shock of divorce made her lose her child. Mehfuza Taj of Udaipur had her marriage broken up in 1975 and brother's wife deserted him because they both are reformists. The Udaipur Youth Association also presented a memorandum listing 39 couples who were forced to divorce. Udaipur Jamat has also given such a list. From other places in India and abroad we have received many complaints of forced divorces.

Mrs. Fatimabai Saddiqali Tinwala aged 50 years from Udaipur states that because her family was with the reformist group, her son's wife from orthodox family deserted him and sent to them their six year old crippled girl. She was continuously crying for her mother. When they informed them their reply was "let her die"( bala jaye) and ultimately despite medical treatment she died. Before her death they informed her to visit their daughter. When she came with her brother she had already expired. They assaulted them and false complaint was made that they had poisoned the girl. After post-mortem they were declared innocent.

Mulla Saleh Mohamad Abdul Hussain Salam from Baroda states that he was under social boycott. His younger son's wife went to her father at Indore. Her father was threatened with social boycott and was asked not to send her daughter back to Baroda. Hid elder son's wife has expired. No one is ready to marry him due to threat of social boycott.

ghulam muhammed
Posts: 11653
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 5:34 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#110

Unread post by ghulam muhammed » Tue Mar 01, 2016 7:21 pm

ONE MORE OLD ARTICLE WHICH WILL REMOVE THE MASK OF 52ND DAI AND GIVE AN INSIGHT INTO HIS TRUE CHARACTER :-

Syedna Muhammad Burhanuddin ibn S. Tahir Saifuddin

Upon the death of Saifuddin Sahib in 1385 Hijri (1965 AD) Burhanuddin Sahib took over the reins of Daawat. Saifuddin Sahib's sons decided to erect a monument in memory of their father. So they collected funds from the faithful and started the construction of a mausoleum which, as they said, would match with the Taj Mahal by using white and black marble in the walls and on the floor with Quranic inscriptions on the inner walls of the burial chamber studded with gold and gems. The architect of this mausoleum was Yahya Merchant who was also the architect of the mausoleum of Qauide Aazam Muhammadali Jinnah in Karachi. It must have cost crores of rupees of public money which could have been spent in ameliorating the condition of thousands of community members who are in distress and living below the poverty line. Some of them can be seen begging at the very doorsteps of the Badri Mahal, the headquarter of Saifuddin Sahib.

The period of Saifuddin Sahib's ministry was 50 years. After Najmuddin Sahib this succession had become hereditary in the Najmi (47th Dai) and Husami (48th Dai) families and was no longer based on knowledge, piety, ability or sincerity.

During the last 50 years the community members, specially those seeking reforms in the society were branded as unbelievers and were harassed and tormented. They became victims of social ostracism because they revolted against the inhuman treatment by the Daawat administration and as they demanded a true and honest rendering of account of the huge collection of public money. Since Burhanuddin Sahib during the life time of his father seemed to be rather liberal minded, kind and meek it was hoped that upon his succession the tyranny to which the community members were so long subjected would stop and an era of peace and security will follow. But alas, this was not to be. Burhanuddin Sahib proved to be more hard hearted than his father. Besides, he appears to be under the influence of his brothers whom he dare not displease. He is neither shrewd nor awe inspiring but like his father is extremely greedy and ruthless in his dealings. From the day he took over there has been greater trouble in the community. People are suffering even more than before and the unrest is increasing day by day.

Societies have come into existence in most of the major cities to express resentment against the treatment by the priest class of the community members who are seeking redress for their grievances but most important of all for demanding from Burhanuddin Sahib and his associates an account of how and where the wealth of the community is being spent. Some of the prominent societies are the Dawoodi Bohra Jamaat, Mumbai, the Dawoodi Bohra Roshan Khayal Jamaat, Malegaon, the Dawoodi Bohra Jamaat, Udaipur and the Bohra Youth, Udaipur, the Dawoodi Bohra Welfare Society in Great Britain, London, the Association of Progressive Dawoodi Bohras of Ontario, Canada and Nairobi Group Charitable Society, Nairobi, East Africa.

Four of the top grade ulamaa (scholars) of the Saifee Daras in Surat (which was renamed Jaamia Saifiyah) were insulted and harassed a number of times through their own pupils at the instance of Yousuf Najmuddin, the brother of Burhanuddin Sahib and (father-in-law of Mansoos) because they knew that no 'nas' was declared by the 46 th Dai, although so far they had not disclosed it in public. They were Sheikh Sajjad Husain, his brother Sheikh Hasanali, Sheikh Ali Ahmed and Sheikh Ahmedali. The pupils were told by Yousuf Najmuddin that these four ulamaa did not believe in Hazrat Ali, they ridiculed the Ahle Bait, Islam, Faatemi Daawat and Imam Husain's maatam and they had led astray a number of families. In 1393 Hijri he even accused the ulamaa of insulting his late father Saifuddin Sahib by saying, "We (the sons) have buried our father in the gutter." By making this accusation Yousuf Najmuddin himself revealed this fact to the people who were altogether unaware of it.

The ulamaa were dragged out of their homes, spat upon and severely beaten. Sheikh Sajjad Husain, the most senior among them received such fatal wounds that he did not survive long. Their homes were wrecked by the mob, all the furniture was destroyed, all the books were looted and the wives and children were molested.

On learning that Burhanuddin Sahib would be present in Galiakot (in Jamaadil Awwal of 1393 Hijri -1973 AD) a group of the faithful from Udaipur, majority of whom were women, travelled to Galiakot with the dual purpose of visiting the Fakhri shrine and paying respects to Burhanuddin Sahib. But as Burhanuddin Sahib was displeased with the people of Udaipur this group was not allowed access to the shrine. On the other hand goondas were set upon them and they beat the women and began molesting them, shamelessly pulling and tearing their clothes. They appealed to Burhanuddin Sahib who was watching the outrage from the upper balcony, by shouting "Maula save us, Maula save us" but to no avail. Most of the women were compelled to run into the jungle around the shrine to save themselves and their honor and with great difficulty managed to return to Udaipur.

In 1402 Hijri (1 st March 1982 AD) it was decided to observe the day as' black day' to remind the sufferers of the atrocities committed upon them. This was in fact a turning point in the history of Udaipur which was named "My Madinah" by the late Saifuddin Sahib. The belief of the majority of people was shattered and they no longer showed the reverence to Burhanuddin Sahib as before nor accepted him as their religious pontiff. This was followed by several incidents involving violence which further shook the belief of the people of Udaipur. On 6 Muharram 1395 Hijri a brutal attack was launched in Moayyadpura mosque with lathis and knives by Shababis as they were called upon innocent men, women and children who had gathered there for the majlis of Imam Husain (AS). Blood was shed in the mosque, many were injured and one person was killed. It resulted in a series of court cases and Burhanuddin Sahib and his men fought hard for the re-possession of the Moayyadpura and other mosques which were now under the control of the reformist group including the shrines in Udaipur. After much bickering it was decided by the court that Mullaji will be allowed to share only the Moayyadpura mosque with the reformist group.

There were nearly 100 couples in Udaipur who were anxiously awaiting the blessings of Burhanuddin Sahib for the performance of their 'nikaah' but he had withheld permission as they had leanings towards the reformists. After waiting for some time they unanimously decided to go ahead and perform the marriage ceremony without 'raza', and by the Qazis of their choice. All the marriages were performed on 5 Rabiul Awwal 1395 Hijri without any hitch and strictly in accordance with the Shariah. It was a grand ceremony and will be remembered in Udaipur for years to come. This event emboldened people of Udaipur to carry out all their other religious duties and obligations without the need to obtain 'raza' from anyone.

The editor of 'Naseeme Sahar', Sheikh Kalimuddin reported a speech given by Burhanuddin Sahib in which he said, "The position of Saifuddin Sahib is the same as that of Ahmed. In fact he is Ahmed, he is light and he has merged with light. This is the interpretation of the Quranic verse 'Qaaba qausain"'. According to the editor "The Quran describes the attributes of Prophet Muhammad and Aale Muhammad and their Dais specially the 51st Dai. His glory can be felt in the shrine 'Rawdhate Taahira'. The 52nd Dai built this shrine, the like of which was never built before. For 1400 years the Quran was waiting to be inscribed on stone in golden letters and this is the same Quran which Hazrat Ali had written in his house."

In April 1977 a body called 'Nathwani Commission' was appointed at the instance of Citizens for Democracy to investigate into the alleged atrocities committed by the Dawoodi Bohra administration (Kothar) upon the reformists and their families and the imposition of social boycott (baraat) which was worse than excommunication. There was no intention at all to interfere in religion or to challenge any of the Dawoodi Bohra tenets.The members of this commission were Narendra Nathwani and V M Tarkunde both judges of Mumbai high court, Professor Aloo Dastoor, Dr Moin Shakir, Aalam Khundmiri, Professor of Usmania University and Chandrakant Daru. The first sitting of the commission was held on 28 Jamaadil Awwal 1398 Hijri (30 April 1978 AD) in justice Nathwani's bungalow in Malabar Hill, Mumbai. The complainants were required to answer in writing or in person 24 questions on citizens rights and human rights, 13 questions on social boycott (baraat), 18 questions on salaam, gifts etc and some miscellaneous questions. None of them related to religious beliefs of the persons. Despite the attempts of Kothar to stop the hearing it went on smoothly. It was due to the unceasing efforts of Nomanbhai Contractor and Dr Asgharali Engineer that the commission was able to complete its work successfully. Similar sittings were also held in other major cities and a report of over 200 pages was published by the commission in April 1979 AD (1399 Hijri). A summary of the recommendations proposed by the commission in their own words is as follows:

"Our enquiry has shown that there is large-scale infringement of civil liberties and human rights of reformist Bohras at the hands of the priestly class and that those who fail to obey the orders of the Syedna and his Aamils, even in purely secular matters, are subjected to Baraat resulting in complete social boycott, mental torture and frequent physical assaults. The Meesaaq (the oath of unquestioning obedience to the Head Priest) which every Bohra is required to give before he or she attains the age of majority, is used as the main instrument for keeping the entire community under the subjugation of the Syedna and his nominees. On the threat of Baraat (social boycott) and the resulting grave disabilities, Bohras are prevented from reading periodicals which are censored by the Syedna (such as the Bombay Samachar, the Blitz and the Bohra Bulletin); from establishing charitable institutions like orphanages, dispensaries, libraries etc without the prior permission of the Syedna except by submitting to such conditions as he may impose; from contesting elections to municipal and legislative bodies without securing beforehand the blessings of the Syedna; and above all, from having any social contact with a person subjected to Baraat, even if the person is one's husband, wife, mother, sister, father or son. The weapon of Baraat has been used to compel a husband to divorce his wife, a son to disown his father, a mother to refuse to see her son, and a brother or sister to desist from attending the marriage of his or her sister or brother. An ex-communicated member becomes virtually an untouchable in the community, and besides being isolated from his friends and nearest relatives, is unable to attend and offer prayers at the Bohra mosque. Even death does not release him from the taboo, for the dead body is not allowed to be buried at the community's common burial ground. Bohra ]amaats in India and abroad are not allowed to frame their own rules and regulations, but are subjected to authoritarian constitutions granting absolute power to the Syedna and his nominees. Millions of rupees are collected every year from Bohras in India and abroad as customary taxes and Nazranas by the Syedna and his nominees, but the Syedna is not accountable for them to anyone. The Syedna also claims to be the owner of all the Bohra mosques and the sole trustee of all Bohra trusts, and where the accounts of any of these trusts are audited, the work is done by a firm composed of some members of the Bohra community who are also bound by the Meesaaq given by them to the Syedna. For obvious reasons, it is almost impossible to improve this situation by organising a reform movement from within the Bohra community. Any person who fails to obey implicitly the orders of the Syedna and his Aaamils commits a breach of his Meesaaq and is liable to be subjected to Baraat or social boycott. The consequence is that although a large number of Bohras resent the disabilities imposed upon them by the priestly class, they are unwilling to give any public expression to their resentment. We thus found that although a systematic public campaign was organised in the Bohra community to condemn our Commission and to put a stop to its enquiry, quite a few of the campaigners wanted us to carry on the work. While the majority of dissenters are thus unwilling to express their opposition to priestly domination, those who have the courage to do so are unable to carry on a reform movement from within the community".

He also presented for the tomb of Hazrat Zainab silver Zarih the cost of which was met out of public donations. But he earned the title 'Vishahun NeeI' (the sash or band of the Nile) from President Sadat for these donations. Several lakhs of rupees were collected from the community for building a Zarih for Hazrat Abbas. When Burhanuddin Sahib went to Karbala and wished to place the Zarih in position it was discovered that the Zarih was too small and would not fit over the grave. He therefore suggested that the covering over the grave should be trimmed to accommodate the Zarih. The chief caretaker was persuaded to call several engineers to do the job but they all refused saying that they could not and would not do such alteration. One of the most famous engineers from Iran was then called for. But he also refused as he considered it a sacrilege. In the end the Iraqi authorities decided to reject the Zarih offered by Burhanuddin Sahib and installed one of their own.

In 1979 Burhanuddin Sahib traveled with a retinue of about 21 persons in the famous ship Elizabeth II spending approximately 53,000 rupees per head. The voyage covered places like Colombo, Singapore and Hong Kong where huge collections were made by way of 'salaam' from the faithful. It is common knowledge that on a ship of this kind entertainment and facilities which are considered 'haraam' in our Shariah are available.

Burhanuddin Sahib is said to be very fond of being photographed specially with dignitaries. His photos appear in newspapers and magazines and even on calendars. Once the Urdu paper 'Blitz' published his photograph where he is seen standing in a queue behind Rafique Zakaria waiting to shake hands with Queen Elizabeth of England. The magazine 'Naseeme Sahar' published a photo showing Burhanuddin Sahib sitting in front of the Queen with folded hands. The desire for pictures is so great that Burhanuddin Sahib has exceeded even his father in expecting every household to keep his picture and that of his father without fail. By some their pictures are kept even in the Quran in the chapter Yaseen. It would not be inappropriate at this point to mention an episode from the life of Prophet Muhammad (SA). Once the angels came to the house of the Prophet and found that there was a curtain hanging on the door. The angels hesitated and did not enter the house. The reason for this hesitation was that there were pictures on the curtain. Immediately the Prophet removed the curtain and the angels entered.

A number of projects and schemes were announced by Burhanuddin Sahib some of which were never completed, some never even started, but he never failed to collect funds from the faithful. Some of them are listed below:

1. "In order to give better training to pupils in Jaamia Saifiyah teachers will be invited from Egypt." This did not materialize.
2. "Magazines will be issued regularly." Four or five issues came out and then it stopped altogether.
3. "Special attention will be paid to the education of girls." This came into force after a period of 10 years and then not more than 10 girls were able to derive benefit.
4. "A 14 storey building will be constructed next to Jaamia Saifiyah for the pupils." The foundation stone was laid but the building never came up.
5. "A 30 lakh rupees worth of technical college and a 21 lakh rupees worth of Arabic Islamic Academy in Mumbai and 2 lakh rupees worth of high school in Surat will be established." People are waiting to see them.
6. "There will be a provident fund for teachers." So far this has not been provided.
7 "Nahjul Balaagha will be translated into Gujarati and will be published together with a number of other religious books." This has not been done.
8. "To send first class pupils to Jaame Azhar in Cairo or to Muslim Aligarh University." As far as known no pupil has been given this opportunity.
9. In 1979 Burhanuddin Sahib announced the opening of a bank in Mumbai where all transactions would be without interest. All the faithful were told to withdraw their deposits from the Mercantile Cooperative Bank, Mumbai which was the only bank started by the community members, specially Zainul Aabedin Rangoonwalla who was one of the pioneers in establishing this bank and raising it to a high standard in the banking world. Its Dawoodi Bohra employees were coerced to resign from their jobs in the bank as it was dealing in interest. In May 1982 goondas were posted around the bank picketing and coaxing the faithful not to have any transactions with the bank.

Nothing however became of the interest free bank promised by Burhanuddin Sahib.It is believed that apart from collecting funds under some pretext or the other Burhanuddin Sahib derives from the community as 'waajebaat' an income of about 12 crore rupees every year. The question is how and where this amount is spent.

Many industrial and commercial organizations in India are owned or controlled by Burhanuddin Sahib and his brothers. Some of them worth mentioning are Sultan Brothers and His Holiness Dr Syedna Tahir Saifuddin Memorial Foundation. Burhanuddin Sahib's brothers Yousuf Najmuddin, Shabbir Nuruddin and Qasim Hakimuddin were among the directors of these companies. Sultan Brothers built the 5 star hotel in Mumbai named Ambassador Hotel. For years the family of Saifuddin Sahib enjoyed the income from that hotel where drinking of alcohol was a common sight and all kinds of things prohibited by Shariah were happeneing in it. This hotel was ultimately sold reportedly for rupees 65 lakhs to Rama Narang, a smuggler, who paid rupees 30 lakhs in black money thus evading the stamp duty to the Government on transfer, according to a report published in the paper 'Blitz'.

In order to divert the attention of the faithful from the success of the 1982 International Dawoodi Bohra Conference in Mumbai it was widely publicized that water had appeared in the 'Rawdhate Taahirah' and that this was one of the many miracles of late Saifuddin Sahib. There is nothing unusual in this because leakage of water can sometimes occur from the cooling system.

During the Ramadhan of 1978 some of the Dawoodi members in Mombasa, East Africa were prevented from entering the local mosque simply because they had criticised some of the malpractices of the Mullaji Burhanuddin Sahib and his deputies and therefore were considered as his enemies. As soon as news of this incident reached London some of the reformists approached Mufti Abdul Baqui for a ruling ('fatwa'). The Mufti gave the following 'fatwa' on 21 August 1978 (17 Ramadhan 1398 Hijri):

'Unlike other buildings or properties a mosque stands out as a unique structure because of its special significance and use as a place of worship. It belongs to Allah and cannot be owned by an individual or group of individuals. The use of the mosque is governed by the laws of Allah that is the laws of Shariah and no other law can prevail in the mosque. It can neither be sold nor purchased by an individual or an institution for its own purposes. It is unlawful to carry on any business within its precincts. Those who prevent people from entering the mosque for prayers are the greatest tyrants ('zaalim'). The doors of mosques should not be kept closed unless there is danger of theft. '

Another 'fatwa' was obtained on 14 July 1979 (19 Shaabaan 1399 Hijri) by Sheikh Salehbhai Moosaji of Colombo from the Board of Fatwas of Jaame Azhar, Cairo. It is reproduced below:
Q.l. Does Islam permit a man or woman to worship by prostration anyone whatever his dignity and to kiss his feet?
Islam does not allow any Muslim to perform 'sajdah' (prostration) before anyone other than Allah or to kiss anybody's feet.
Does Islam permit 'baraat' or social ostracism on any Muslim?
A. Islam does not allow any Muslim whatever his social or religious status may be to order any other Muslim to obey his commands blindly. This is in contravention of the commands of Allah. The Prophet said, "No obedience to the created if it means disobedience to Allah". If anyone boycotts a Muslim and calls upon other Muslims to do so, that is to refrain from dealing with him or prevent him from entering a mosque, he commits a great sin.

Q.3. Does Islam permit the high priest to take 'meesaaq' or oath of allegiance from believers in his own name?
A. No human being has the right to take such an undertaking from anyone.

Q.4. Does Islam allow Sheikhs and leaders to own mosques and waqf properties and thereby hold the power to prevent a Muslim from entering a mosque?
A. Mosques and waqf properties cannot be owned by an individual or institution and no one has a right to prevent anyone from entering them. These are the properties of Allah and can be used by any Muslim without any distinction.

Q.5. Can a sum of money big or small be charged to a man (rich or poor) to ensure his and his relatives' entry into paradise?
A. This is a despicable act of monks and priests who sell a place in paradise to those who can afford to pay a sum of money. These people will receive severe punishment on the day of judgment. Allah will reward everyone according to his deeds and not according to how much money he pays to purchase a share in paradise.

Q.6. Can a muslim dignitary order another Muslim to divorce his wife and boycott his parents and on refusal be prevented from entering paradise?
A. The Prophet said that among all permitted things the most hateful to Allah is 'divorce'. Allah commands the muslims to protect and show kindness to wives and parents. If anyone goes against this he disobeys Allah.

Yet another 'fatwa' was obtained by Fidahusein Adamali of Nairobi, East Africa from the Ministry of Justice, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in 1977 (27 Jamaadil Awwal1399 Hijri). The following are the summarized questions and answers:

Q.l. The Bohra Mullaji insists upon his followers to perform 'sajdah' for him every time they visit him. Was there such practice in the days of the Prophet or the guided caliphs?
A. The 'sajdah' is a form of worship commanded by Allah for Him only and should therefore be offered to none other than Allah. The followers of Mullaji are worshipping him and ascribing a partner to Allah and having their own God above Allah. His ordering the followers to do this or his tacit agreement to it makes him a tyrant (taaghoot).

Q.2. Is it permitted in Islam for women to kiss the hands and feet of Mullaji and other male members of his family?
A. In Islam this is not allowed. No such practice existed in the time of the Prophet or the guided caliphs. When the believing women would come to the Prophet to give the pledge of faith and loyalty,he would take the pledge verbally and never touch or shake hands with them. The kissing of hands and feet of Mullaji and others by the women amounts to 'shirk' and is an unpardonable sin.

Q.3. The Mullaji claims that he is the master of the souls of all the followers. Can such a claim be justified?
A. This is false and absurd. It is Allah alone Who is the owner of all the souls because it is He Who has created them.

Q.4. The Mullaji claims that he is the owner of all properties of religious trusts and that he does not have to render account because he is God on earth. Can he make such a claim?
A. The properties of religious trusts cannot be owned. What is owned is the benefit of their yield. The Mullaji does not own any trust property nor is he entitled to any yield except what has been earmarked for him, if he deserves it. Every person must render account of how he uses the trust property according to the Holy Book, the tradition of the Prophet and the general agreement of the Muslim ummah. The Mullaji's claim that he is God on earth is a flagrant infidelity and he will be treated as 'taaghoot'.

Q.5. The Mullaji claims that he has the right to declare the cancellation of people's sins and to apply social boycott against those who oppose any of his actions. Can we accept this claim?
A. The Mullaji is indirectly claiming divinity for himself which is no more than infidelity. In fact he should accept the advice of people if it is for improvement and for the benefit of all instead of applying social boycott against them.

Q.6. Does Islam permit religious persecution? The Bohras are Muslims believing in the glorious Quran and the teachings of Islam. Can persecution be justified against them?
A. Islam does not sanction the persecution of Muslims with sincere belief in the Quran and the tradition of the Holy Prophet. The Mullaji's agreement to persecution amounts to infidelity.

anajmi
Posts: 13403
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#111

Unread post by anajmi » Tue Mar 01, 2016 9:51 pm

Bro Wajid,

You are absolutely right about Haroon (as). If Allah hadn't revealed the truth in the Quran we would've blamed him. But that is not the case. We know the truth precisely because it was revealed in the Quran. That doesn't mean everyone can hide behind the story of Haroon (as) to avoid being blamed. If someone is being wrongly blamed, then he should be patient. There isn't going to be a new revelation that will vindicate him. I personally believe that one who hides behind the story of Haroon (as) is probably trying to deflect blame.

We have bro Biradar giving the example of Ali (ra) suffering at the hands of his 1,2,3 and saying that SKQ is the Ali (ra) of today. And at the same time we have the followers of SMS who give the example of the prophet (saw) keeping 1,2,3 close to him just like SMB kept SKQ close to him. So depending upon who you talk to, the roles switch. It is a big joke. One part of the Dawoodi Bohras are the followers of 1,2,3 according to the other and the other are also the followers of 1,2,3 according to the first. So in effect, all Dawoodi Bohras are followers of 1,2,3!!!

Wajid
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:52 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#112

Unread post by Wajid » Tue Mar 01, 2016 10:59 pm

Salaam Anajmi bhai,
First of all, my analogy only applies if you believe in SMB (ra) as a rightful Dai of Imam us Zamaan. It's obviously not the case with you. So no worries.

Secondly, the plight of Maula Ali (as) is well documented in the Islamic literature. Bhai Biradar only cited one Khutba from Nahajul Balahah. If you dispute the authenticity of the book then this isn't the right forum for discussion on that.

Lastly, we followers of SKQ (tus) never indulge in the vilification and laanat baazi like the "iblisi toli" of MS. Such silly and stupid comparisons of 123 etc. can only be expected from the intellectually void and defunct kothari mafias with a sole objective is ayyashi and creating a generation of morons ...

وَذَرِ الَّذِينَ اتَّخَذُوا دِينَهُمْ لَعِبًا وَلَهْوًا وَغَرَّتْهُمُ الْحَيَاةُ الدُّنْيَا
And leave alone those who take their religion as play and amusement, and are deceived by the life of this world...

Fi AmanIllah

Sufi monk
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2012 7:34 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#113

Unread post by Sufi monk » Tue Mar 01, 2016 11:08 pm

One part of the Dawoodi Bohras are the followers of 1,2,3 according to the other and the other are also the followers of 1,2,3 according to the first. So in effect, all Dawoodi Bohras are followers of 1,2,3!!!
bulls eye... lol

Tayyeb
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:30 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#114

Unread post by Tayyeb » Tue Mar 01, 2016 11:54 pm

Lastly, we followers of SKQ (tus) never indulge in the vilification and laanat baazi like the "iblisi toli" of MS
watch this video 13 mins onwards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIdYsd-N1d8

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#115

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:08 am

Ghulam Mohammad,

I don't want to respond to your long post, at least at present. However, lets start off with the first sentence itself:

"After the humiliating defeat in the Chandabhoy Galla Case"

Can you show me where it says STS lost the Chadabhoy Galla Case? I have myself read the whole case history, and there is also an excerpt from "Indian Courts and Characters" right here on this site. It does not say there was a "humiliating defeat". Please point out paragraph and page number where it does. Text is available here itself.

Many of these court cases are not so clear-cut. The case was far more than simply use of galla money. I do not hold STS blameless, but to start off with "humiliating defeat in the Chandabhoy Galla Case" immediately removes any credibility you have.

Also, the situation with the four ustaads in Jaamia is very complex. Its not simply that they were good guys and STS/SMB and others were bad guys. Truth is more subtle than that. The history of this goes back almost 150 years, and as I said, perhaps even to the time of S. Abdeali Saifuddin. I have read and heard the tapes in which Ahmed Ali Raj presents his version of the truth. I can tell you, he is not a very reliable person. He confuses the matter, and often admits that S. Mohammad Badruddin praised S. Abdulqader Najmuddin, but then backtracks by putting some conditions on it. He also admits that the mazoon at that time had written letters, acknowledging the naas had been done on S. Abdulqader Najmuddin (who was mukaasir at that time), but then again tries to say these letters were dated before he (mazoon sahib) had come to Surat.

In fact, that incident of the 47th da'i was simply a power struggle between ulaama and the da'i. At that time the ulaama were strong due to the phenomenal rise in power from the da'i-ship of the 44th and 45th da'is, who were at first students in the jaamia, and not descended from other da'is. Hence, the power of the ulaama rose dramatically, at the expense of the power of the da'is. I have been studying this matter, and I will present my analysis at some later date.

Now, I agree that what happened with the four ustaads was not good. The Kothar behaved in a atrocious manner, taking advantage of essentially poor, pious people. Yes, we should blame them, but I think the whole history of the last 150 years needs to be understood as a whole before conclusions drawn. I am more than glad to discuss this, but I have not fully understood this period (yet) myself. However, I can tell you that the story is not so one sided as you think. Often, religious struggles have a different ethical calculus which is hard to understand. Anyway, I don't take what you are saying serious. Simply cut-paste will not do, and arguments from boredom won't work.
Last edited by Biradar on Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:33 am, edited 2 times in total.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#116

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:13 am

Tayyeb wrote:
Lastly, we followers of SKQ (tus) never indulge in the vilification and laanat baazi like the "iblisi toli" of MS
watch this video 13 mins onwards

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIdYsd-N1d8
Not that it will make any difference, but there is no laanat baazi in this clip at all. In general, its traditional to curse the enemies of dawaat. Don't you do it in every masjlis? ("Jahaanam ma hazaaro saal jaalse aap na dushmaan"). At present, the dushmaan of dawaat are Dawedaar Mr. Muffadul Saifuddin (DMMS), his brothers, children and uncles. This is exactly what SKQ is saying. So stop being a hypocrite.

Biradar
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#117

Unread post by Biradar » Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:25 am

Incidentally, I want to say that even though I support Ali over One, Two, Three, I do not curse the latter three. Perhaps they were acting in good faith, and did what they did because they thought it was the right thing to do. Of course, it was ultimately the wrong thing, as they snatched away the right of Ali, but perhaps one can forgive them. However, I certainly curse Muawiyah and his son Yazid. Anyone who openly rebels against Ali and comes to fight with him, is accursed and bound for hell. Which includes, by the way, Aisha bint Abu Bakr. About this battle (The Battle of Jamaal) Ali says (in Sermon 13):
Nahjul Balagha, Sermon 13 wrote: You were the army of a woman and in the command of a quadruped. When it grumbled you responded, and when it was wounded (hamstrung) you fled away. Your character is low and your pledge is broken. Your faith is hypocrisy. Your water is brackish. He who stays with you is laden with sins and he who forsakes you secures Allah’s mercy. It is as though I see your mosque prominent, resembling the surface of a boat, while Allah has sent chastisement from above and from below it and everyone who is on it is drowned.
Obviously, whoever supports Yazid (LA) is cursed and bound for hell. May he and his supporters burn in hell.

Tayyeb
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:30 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#118

Unread post by Tayyeb » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:15 am

Also, the situation with the four ustaads in Jaamia is very complex. Its not simply that they were good guys and STS/SMB and others were bad guys.
do you know one of those ustaad was ustaad of SMB, how many students in history of dawat has killed and humiliated their own teachers?

anajmi
Posts: 13403
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#119

Unread post by anajmi » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:16 am

Dear Bro Wajid,

I absolutely dispute the authenticity if Nahjul Balagha or at least those parts of it where Ali (ra) appears to be a child who is whining cause his toy was taken away from him and is now cursing every one for it. It does not do justice to the great character of Ali (ra) who was promised heaven on earth, being portrayed as selfish man crying over his inheritance. These great people weren't interested in duniya. Did Ali get his inheritance? No he did not. So ultimately this inheritance was of no value to him. People say that he was very wise. You seriously think a wise man who has been already promised heaven, would become a jilted pouting individual like he has been portrayed in these books? Why would someone become so spiteful for something that is of no value in the eyes of Allah and his great followers?

Ali was supposed to be the master in the understanding of the Quran. What does the Quran teach? What is of a higher value? The here or the hereafter? And what is Ali crying about in these books?

Tayyeb
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 2:30 pm

Re: Khuzema Qutbuddin (and related topics) - 2016

#120

Unread post by Tayyeb » Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:17 am

This is exactly what SKQ is saying. So stop being a hypocrite.
your friend wajid said SKQ followers dont curse any one, In reply I posted video proof where SKQ is cursing MS (so called dawat no dushman) and I am being a hypocrite?